Air Yeezy Wolf Grey

and neighbors. Both references use the general signal without elaboration. The first one is a parenthetical in 982. 551(l). The second appears in Nike Air Force Elephant Print

﻿guage in a statute or regulation will typically supersede general treatment of a subject if conflict or tension exists between the expressions. See TBI, Inc. v. Board of Health of N. Andover, 431 Mass. 9, 18 (2000). However, we do not find the cross references to 982. 553 to be so specific as to shrink the language of 982. 551(l) and 982. 552(c)(1)(i) creating a sanctionable family obligation to refrain from criminal activity that threatens the health, safety or right to peaceful enjoyment of other residents Nike Huarache Emerald Green

An equally plausible interpretation is that the cross references are simply sending the reader to adjacent provisions for a comprehensive understanding of the grounds for termination, and not that any one ground is curtailing another. Other relevant canons converge in support of the ground of criminal activity that threatens the health, safety or right to peaceful enjoyment of other residents and neighbors as a basis for termination independent of criminal activity of a violent or drug or alcohol related character. Every substantive word of a provision should count. None should be superfluous, meaningless, barren, or ineffectual. Gordon, 373 Mass. 199, 201 202 (1977); Baystate Med. Center v. Blue Cross of Mass. , Air Yeezy Wolf Grey Inc. , 382 Mass. 485, 491 (1981). Courts will view a regulatory scheme as a whole and whenever possible will interpret overlapping or concurrent treatment of a common subject by multiple provisions harmoniously so as to preserve some useful effect for each one. v. Rent Control Bd.

of Brookline, 358 Mass. 686, 697 699 (1971); Board of Educ. v. Assessors of Worcester, 368 Mass. 511, 513 514 (1975). Courts will also avoid literal interpretations contradictory of the visible purpose of a provision. Bedford, 378 Mass. 562, 570 (1979); Bates v. Director of the Office of Campaign Political Fin. , 436 Mass. 144, 165 168 (2002). The interpretation of the Housing Court creates an unnecessary conflict between the regulations. It effectively nullifies a discrete provision of substance: a category of criminal activity unrelated to violence, drugs, or alcohol but threatening to the health, safety, or quiet enjoyment of residents and neighbors and therefore warranting section 8 termination. It renders a clause of 982. 551(l) meaningless, fails to reconcile it with the ambiguous cross references to 981. 553, and tends to contradict the perceptible purpose of the clause to make a distinct body of criminal behavior subject to termination. A point of rule making history supports this anal.

Nothing in 982. 553 suggests that this silence voided the proscriptions about criminal activity in 982. 551 and 982. 552. Nike Air Max 2015

982. 552 in combination with a cross reference to 982. 551 and the duty to avoid the more general threatening criminal activity. Section 982. 553 deals exclusively with termination for criminal activity of a violent or drug or alcohol related nature. It is silent about criminal activity.